OldGnome wrote:However, my understanding of the data used by Garmin is that it is "informational" and "used for calculating trip times."

That doesn't give me a lot of confidence in the accuracy of the data. I have, in fact, found a few locations where we lived in WI where the data is quite inaccurate.

Every GPS I owned between 1998 and now offered this so-much-wanted speedalert. With fresh mapdata I would get irrelevant warnings some of the time; before the maps where 2 years old I would get false positives (and false negatives, but you don't hear those) all of the time. This type of data is very volatile and changing all of the time.

fvwazing wrote:With fresh mapdata I would get irrelevant warnings some of the time...

My biggest complaint with Garmin was when they introduced the "you are driving faster than the posted speed" alert by turning the current speed font red. It was both difficult to read at night and impossible to disable.

daknife wrote:Yet if it's such an impossible task to accomplish using crowd sourcing, then how pray tell did the other stand-alone nav gadgets (Tom Tom, Garmin etc...) get their speed limit databases built without the power of crowdsourcing?

Either that or they'll report or correct the data themselves, and the speed limit data will soon be far more accurate than on any other service out there. Just as letting people drive on incomplete maps is a complete waste of time, and naming streets or numbering houses is a complete waste of time. Your logic simply does not follow in regards to a user edited platform.

And as to the $$$$ reply, yes they paid for the speed limit data from some source. Waze can get that same data for free within a very short period of time.

daknife wrote:Either that or they'll report or correct the data themselves, and the speed limit data will soon be far more accurate than on any other service out there. Just as letting people drive on incomplete maps is a complete waste of time, and naming streets or numbering houses is a complete waste of time. Your logic simply does not follow in regards to a user edited platform.

And as to the $$$$ reply, yes they paid for the speed limit data from some source. Waze can get that same data for free within a very short period of time.

The logic absolutely follows. The maps do not need to be 100% to be useful, speed limits do. The map will gradually learn of its own accord if left long enough, speed limits will not. Maps are crucial to the functioning of the map, speed limits are not. Look out your windscreen to see speed limits, if there are not enough signs then contact your local council!

Waze will undoubtedly bend to pressure on this and implement something, it'll be horribly labour intensive, data will be patchy at best and most folk will either switch it off or end up complaining on here about how bad it is.

Another big issue here is that Waze would likely base this info on a per road segment basis. The speed limits are not necessarily going to change at the location of a segment on the Waze map. So segments will have to be inserted all over the map and there is no insert segment function in WME. Yes, you can create a temporary road, junction, and remove - but it's not intuitive. What happens when newbie editors forget to set the turn restrictions as these new junctions? The routing is going to break.

Then what will happen when an editor who does not realize a junction is on the map for a speed limit change? When the junction is deleted which speed limit will Waze keep of the two that were split at the junction? Oops, there you go more bad data.

If Waze implements this in their usual way it's going to be a complete mess.